Re: [elm-discuss] Re: Why is "port" forbidden as field name inside record?

2016-12-20 Thread Max Goldstein
This restriction is annoying, but it's easy to relax later (from an API perspective, maybe not an implementation one). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Elm Discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an ema

Re: [elm-discuss] Re: Why is "port" forbidden as field name inside record?

2016-12-20 Thread Paul Dijou
Cool, glad to know it's tracked, didn't see the issue when searching. Le vendredi 16 décembre 2016 08:55:50 UTC+1, s...@porto5.com a écrit : > > This is in a list of suggestions to be addressed some day > https://github.com/elm-lang/elm-compiler/issues/1375 > 'Allow keywords as record field names'

Re: [elm-discuss] Re: Why is "port" forbidden as field name inside record?

2016-12-15 Thread s
This is in a list of suggestions to be addressed some day https://github.com/elm-lang/elm-compiler/issues/1375 'Allow keywords as record field names' It seems this can be possible, just not done yet. On Friday, December 16, 2016 at 11:23:23 AM UTC+11, Nick H wrote: > > Ah, I guess you would run i

Re: [elm-discuss] Re: Why is "port" forbidden as field name inside record?

2016-12-15 Thread Nick H
Ah, I guess you would run into typing issues if you tried to use a Dict... that's just my knee-jerk response when people ask about doing things with records that you can't do with records :-| On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Nick H wrote: > If you want something that can hold arbitrary string k

Re: [elm-discuss] Re: Why is "port" forbidden as field name inside record?

2016-12-15 Thread Nick H
If you want something that can hold arbitrary string keys like a JavaScript object, you can use a Dict. Making keywords context-sensitive would be a language designer's nightmare. I don't think most languages allow this. Which contexts would the keywords be reserved, and which would they not be? E

[elm-discuss] Re: Why is "port" forbidden as field name inside record?

2016-12-15 Thread Ian Mackenzie
Well, it certainly seems easier to make a robust parser if keywords are not context-dependent. Yes, perhaps you could tell that { port = "foo" } is a record with a 'port' field, but what about port = "foo"? Is that a record missing its opening and closing braces, or a messed-up declaration of an

[elm-discuss] Re: Why is "port" forbidden as field name inside record?

2016-12-15 Thread Paul Dijou
Both solutions are valid (I'm actually using both depending on the situation) but my main question is why is there such a limitation? Reserved keywords could (should?) depend on the context. You cannot define a real port inside a record, you just want a string to name a property. For example, i